Clarkson "I'd shoot strikers"

[Abingdonman]

Its things like this that make me SO glad I've lived the best part of my life when I did(up to now! )
this 'offending ' attitude(in general) along with nanny state,PC,health & safety,all the rubbish about being fat/thin and health in general,what a bunch of cissies,I'd emigrate if I could,the only problem is ...........
all the best countries are going the same way!

[King Cobra]

Giving to charity doesn't mean he isn't an offensive, self-centred oaf.

Funnily enough, last night when the One Show started and Matt Baker announced that the guest was Jeremy Clarkson we switched it off. It was almost inevitable he would say something stupid.

So you've met him in person have you and have personal experience of his self centred oafishness?

[DerekF]

Giving to charity doesn't mean he isn't an offensive, self-centred oaf.

Funnily enough, last night when the One Show started and Matt Baker announced that the guest was Jeremy Clarkson we switched it off. It was almost inevitable he would say something stupid.

So you've met him in person have you and have personal experience of his self centred oafishness?

No I haven't met him in person. I see enough of him on TV to make a judgment. I'll admit I may be wrong and he may be a really nice chap but I would say the odds are against it.

I have to say that it's a new one on me that I have to meet someone in person before offering an opinion.

[Edicap]

My only regret is the fact that he apologised!

The Unions are quick enough to run to the BBC when it suits the, it was a joke for heavens sake! If I had a gun, I would probably have shot the ones that walked past the office in Glasgow yesterday!

A sharp letter is winging its way to Unison as we speak!

[DerekF]

My only regret is the fact that he apologised!

The Unions are quick enough to run to the BBC when it suits the, it was a joke for heavens sake! If I had a gun, I would probably have shot the ones that walked past the office in Glasgow yesterday!

A sharp letter is winging its way to Unison as we speak!

The problem was, as far as being a joke is concerned, it was lacking one major factor. It wasn't funny.

[Dragon Rapide]

DerekF - do I detect a strong streak of masochism, since you voluntary see such a lot of this offensive, self-centred oaf on television. I wonder why you would want to put yourself through such an ordeal so often, when you could always switch off, as you did the other evening.

[DerekF]

Ah well there you'd be wrong. I said I see "enough" of him to make a judgement which is actually not a "lot" as you seem to have read into what I wrote.

[King Cobra]

Giving to charity doesn't mean he isn't an offensive, self-centred oaf.

Funnily enough, last night when the One Show started and Matt Baker announced that the guest was Jeremy Clarkson we switched it off. It was almost inevitable he would say something stupid.

So you've met him in person have you and have personal experience of his self centred oafishness?

No I haven't met him in person. I see enough of him on TV see make a judgment. I'll admit I may be wrong and he may be a really nice chap but I would say the odds are against it.

I have to say that it's a new one on me that I have to meet someone in person before offering an opinion.

So you judge a person on the evidence of their on screen persona, a persona which is quite possibly completely different to their off screen one.
As the old saying goes "Never judge a person until you've walked a mile in their shoes."

[Dragon Rapide]

Ah well there you'd be wrong. I said I see "enough" of him to make a judgement which is actually not a "lot" as you seem to have read into what I wrote.

Well you write "see enough" in the present tense, which implies that you continue to watch him, hence my suggestion of a masochistic streak.

[chally2]

Classic Clarkson, throws a bone in the air and watches all the little doggies pointlessly barking,yelping and fighting over it, he must have pissed himself laughing, as i and quite a few others did

[DerekF]

Giving to charity doesn't mean he isn't an offensive, self-centred oaf.

Funnily enough, last night when the One Show started and Matt Baker announced that the guest was Jeremy Clarkson we switched it off. It was almost inevitable he would say something stupid.

So you've met him in person have you and have personal experience of his self centred oafishness?

No I haven't met him in person. I see enough of him on TV see make a judgment. I'll admit I may be wrong and he may be a really nice chap but I would say the odds are against it.

I have to say that it's a new one on me that I have to meet someone in person before offering an opinion.

So you judge a person on the evidence of their on screen persona, a persona which is quite possibly completely different to their off screen one.
As the old saying goes "Never judge a person until you've walked a mile in their shoes."

Which means you're a mile away and have their shoes...

So he has an on-screen persona and off-screen one does he? You'd think he'd make the "all-round ace chap" persona the on-screen one wouldn't you rather than the insufferable prat one. You'll be telling me Jim Davidson is a great guy as well next....

Ah well there you'd be wrong. I said I see "enough" of him to make a judgement which is actually not a "lot" as you seem to have read into what I wrote.

Well you write "see enough" in the present tense, which implies that you continue to watch him, hence my suggestion of a masochistic streak.

I think you may be reading rather too much into what others write.

[King Cobra]

Giving to charity doesn't mean he isn't an offensive, self-centred oaf.

Funnily enough, last night when the One Show started and Matt Baker announced that the guest was Jeremy Clarkson we switched it off. It was almost inevitable he would say something stupid.

So you've met him in person have you and have personal experience of his self centred oafishness?

No I haven't met him in person. I see enough of him on TV see make a judgment. I'll admit I may be wrong and he may be a really nice chap but I would say the odds are against it.

I have to say that it's a new one on me that I have to meet someone in person before offering an opinion.

So you judge a person on the evidence of their on screen persona, a persona which is quite possibly completely different to their off screen one.
As the old saying goes "Never judge a person until you've walked a mile in their shoes."

Which means you're a mile away and have their shoes...

So he has an on-screen persona and off-screen one does he? You'd think he'd make the "all-round ace chap" persona the on-screen one wouldn't you rather than the insufferable prat one. You'll be telling me Jim Davidson is a great guy as well next....

Ah well there you'd be wrong. I said I see "enough" of him to make a judgement which is actually not a "lot" as you seem to have read into what I wrote.

There you go again, making assumptions. It depends what market Clarkson, or anyone else for that matter, is selling to. If he wants to be popular amongst you "New Age Puritans" and the "Moral Majority" then he'll project a persona, real or not, which appeals to that market. If he thinks he can make more money from the "Lads" market then he'll project a persona, again real or not, which appeals that market. Simples.

[andyxh558]

After all his comments, he was asked about his involvement in Help for heroes and he was so passionate about the cause and at the end of it he said it was them that deserves the pensions. I agree with that and was that reported about? NO!

[DerekF]

Giving to charity doesn't mean he isn't an offensive, self-centred oaf.

Funnily enough, last night when the One Show started and Matt Baker announced that the guest was Jeremy Clarkson we switched it off. It was almost inevitable he would say something stupid.

So you've met him in person have you and have personal experience of his self centred oafishness?

No I haven't met him in person. I see enough of him on TV see make a judgment. I'll admit I may be wrong and he may be a really nice chap but I would say the odds are against it.

I have to say that it's a new one on me that I have to meet someone in person before offering an opinion.

So you judge a person on the evidence of their on screen persona, a persona which is quite possibly completely different to their off screen one.
As the old saying goes "Never judge a person until you've walked a mile in their shoes."

Which means you're a mile away and have their shoes...

So he has an on-screen persona and off-screen one does he? You'd think he'd make the "all-round ace chap" persona the on-screen one wouldn't you rather than the insufferable prat one. You'll be telling me Jim Davidson is a great guy as well next....

Ah well there you'd be wrong. I said I see "enough" of him to make a judgement which is actually not a "lot" as you seem to have read into what I wrote.

There you go again, making assumptions. It depends what market Clarkson, or anyone else for that matter, is selling to. If he wants to be popular amongst you "New Age Puritans" and the "Moral Majority" then he'll project a persona, real or not, which appeals to that market. If he thinks he can make more money from the "Lads" market then he'll project a persona, again real or not, which appeals that market. Simples.

So acting like a tool appeals to the "lads" market then. I think that says it all. Anyway you were the one that mentioned on and off-screen persona not me.

You seem to have a bit of bee in your bonnet about Jeremy Clarkson. You're not him are you?

[st24]

Since you have no idea how much he gives to charity, the boast about what you'd do given his salary is a bit pointless.

Sorry, I didn't realise you were his accountant and obviously know exactly what he earns and what he gives to charity.
We can all say "yeh I support charities and give loads away" it doesn't excuse being a complete "dwad".... As well as Jim "chalky" Davidson, I seem to recall that everyone's favourite 1980s racist, Bernard Manning, gave loads to charity...

[King Cobra]

Since you have no idea how much he gives to charity, the boast about what you'd do given his salary is a bit pointless.

Sorry, I didn't realise you were his accountant and obviously know exactly what he earns and what he gives to charity.
We can all say "yeh I support charities and give loads away" it doesn't excuse being a complete "dwad".... As well as Jim "chalky" Davidson, I seem to recall that everyone's favourite 1980s racist, Bernard Manning, gave loads to charity...

It's like shooting fish in a barrel, you take the bait so easily.

[King Cobra]

Giving to charity doesn't mean he isn't an offensive, self-centred oaf.

Funnily enough, last night when the One Show started and Matt Baker announced that the guest was Jeremy Clarkson we switched it off. It was almost inevitable he would say something stupid.

So you've met him in person have you and have personal experience of his self centred oafishness?

No I haven't met him in person. I see enough of him on TV see make a judgment. I'll admit I may be wrong and he may be a really nice chap but I would say the odds are against it.

I have to say that it's a new one on me that I have to meet someone in person before offering an opinion.

So you judge a person on the evidence of their on screen persona, a persona which is quite possibly completely different to their off screen one.
As the old saying goes "Never judge a person until you've walked a mile in their shoes."

Which means you're a mile away and have their shoes...

So he has an on-screen persona and off-screen one does he? You'd think he'd make the "all-round ace chap" persona the on-screen one wouldn't you rather than the insufferable prat one. You'll be telling me Jim Davidson is a great guy as well next....

Ah well there you'd be wrong. I said I see "enough" of him to make a judgement which is actually not a "lot" as you seem to have read into what I wrote.

There you go again, making assumptions. It depends what market Clarkson, or anyone else for that matter, is selling to. If he wants to be popular amongst you "New Age Puritans" and the "Moral Majority" then he'll project a persona, real or not, which appeals to that market. If he thinks he can make more money from the "Lads" market then he'll project a persona, again real or not, which appeals that market. Simples.

So acting like a tool appeals to the "lads" market then. I think that says it all. Anyway you were the one that mentioned on and off-screen persona not me.

You seem to have a bit of bee in your bonnet about Jeremy Clarkson. You're not him are you?

No bee, no bonnet but seeing you take the bait is most entertaining.

[DanO1978]

Clarkson has in fact been "out-oafed" in all this by the frankly barmy reaction of the union leaders to it. How anyone can pay union dues (is that what they're called?) to fund a snarling ogre like Bob Crow is frankly baffling. Would you want to be represented by someone like that?

Remember, lefties, how Red Robbo killed British Leyland, and Scargill let down the miners. The benefits members get from unions are nearly always overshadowed by the benefits the leaders get from their positions. All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others, to quote Mr Orwell...

[Abingdonman]

How about poor Alex' & Matt's facial expression's when he said the dreaded word's!...knowing the creepy BBC would be studying their every bit of body language for a hint of mirth for the next few hour's,they looked slightly mortified .....
looks like Jeremy will have to restrict his appearances to the Jonathan Ross,Chris Moyles or Graham Norton show's!

[Eelmoor]

Its a bit ironic that the unions who yesterday tried to bring the country to a halt (and failed miserably by the way ) under the context of saving people jobs and pensions today tried their hardest to get someone sacked !!!

[Dragon Rapide]

"I think you may be reading rather too much into what others write."

I try to avoid reading anything into what people write but to take at face value what they have written, and the inferences to be drawn from what they have written.

I don't think Clarkson plays to any particular gallery. He is what he is and cares little for what people think of him. And underneath the public face I sense a more complex character, who is certainly deeply passionate about the givers as opposed to the takers. He also enjoys taking the piss!

[DerekF]

Giving to charity doesn't mean he isn't an offensive, self-centred oaf.

Funnily enough, last night when the One Show started and Matt Baker announced that the guest was Jeremy Clarkson we switched it off. It was almost inevitable he would say something stupid.

So you've met him in person have you and have personal experience of his self centred oafishness?

No I haven't met him in person. I see enough of him on TV see make a judgment. I'll admit I may be wrong and he may be a really nice chap but I would say the odds are against it.

I have to say that it's a new one on me that I have to meet someone in person before offering an opinion.

So you judge a person on the evidence of their on screen persona, a persona which is quite possibly completely different to their off screen one.
As the old saying goes "Never judge a person until you've walked a mile in their shoes."

Which means you're a mile away and have their shoes...

So he has an on-screen persona and off-screen one does he? You'd think he'd make the "all-round ace chap" persona the on-screen one wouldn't you rather than the insufferable prat one. You'll be telling me Jim Davidson is a great guy as well next....

Ah well there you'd be wrong. I said I see "enough" of him to make a judgement which is actually not a "lot" as you seem to have read into what I wrote.

There you go again, making assumptions. It depends what market Clarkson, or anyone else for that matter, is selling to. If he wants to be popular amongst you "New Age Puritans" and the "Moral Majority" then he'll project a persona, real or not, which appeals to that market. If he thinks he can make more money from the "Lads" market then he'll project a persona, again real or not, which appeals that market. Simples.

So acting like a tool appeals to the "lads" market then. I think that says it all. Anyway you were the one that mentioned on and off-screen persona not me.

You seem to have a bit of bee in your bonnet about Jeremy Clarkson. You're not him are you?

No bee, no bonnet but seeing you take the bait is most entertaining.

Ah, I see. Now that you've lost the argument you were just stringing me along. I think it is called trolling.

Dan, your constant anti-union tirades are tiresome and to be honest an insult to ordinary working people who rely on unions to protect them from unscrupulous employers (like the government). I could give you a list of the very many great things that trade unions have achieved but I suspect they would fall on deaf ears.

[King Cobra]

@DerekF.
Typical left wing. Who says you've won the argument? By calling me a troll I'd say that it's you who's lost the argument by resorting to ad hominem remarks.

[King Cobra]

Of course had Clarkson made similar remarks about the EDL or NF, you wouldn't have heard a peep out of the union oligarchs or the pseudo liberals who've been so "outraged" on here and elsewhere.

[DerekF]

@DerekF.
Typical left wing. Who says you've won the argument? By calling me a troll I'd say that it's you who's lost the argument by resorting to ad hominem remarks.

I'd say I've won the argument. You said you were just baiting me to get a response, what sort of "discussion" is that? I'd say it was the last resort of someone who has lost the argument.

Of course had Clarkson made similar remarks about the EDL or NF, you wouldn't have heard a peep out of the union oligarchs or the pseudo liberals who've been so "outraged" on here and elsewhere.

But he didn't did he? He made the remarks about ordinary working people.